| The Historian 2005-08-14, 8:31 pm |
|
Rob wrote:
quote:
>
> This was reposted by someone in the FIDE news group. It is well said
> and I would hope that anyone with a penchant for history would
> recognize it's merit.
Let's see how Rob would classify the following little gems, pulled from
the newsgroup posts of Phil Innes made August 13, 2005:
quote:
>
> Harsh criticism is one thing, but gadflies have a few traits that make
> them
> standout
>
> I.) Name calling, such as: scum bags, pimps, low life scumbags,
> crooks,
> thieves, fools, criminals and even misanthropes.
"...he is a stalker...", "...this son of a XXXXX...", "...people think
he is a turd...", "...a distorter...", "He
is true American sicko. He has previously speculated on my sex life,
whereas
he himself appears not to have any, and has never professed any
interest in
women, and even thinks that when other people talk of sex it is
'dirty'. Yet
this 400+ pounder who we might imagine is no Errol Flynn, likes to
suggest
what other's sex lives should be." "...crank bunch of people...",
"...compulsive public schizoid liar..."
quote:
> II.) Serious accusations on criminal acts, gross mismanagement and
> other
> acts of malfeasance in office; made in a public forum and/or mass mail
> outs.
> Accusations so serious, that the more proper forum would be to file
> complaints
> at the State Attorney's office, or initiate the procedures to have the
> subjects
> of these complaints removed from office. In each of these, there would
> be
> investigation, a process of discovery; where the accused would have the
> right
> to defend himself.
"...stalker...", "...continues to libel anyone
[everone!] who has achieved more than he", "...formal legal action..."
|